Having seen some of the criticisms of NGS maps in general I will admit that they tend to be more biased towards political and anthropological geography as opposed to the physical terrain. I don't see this as a fault. If I wanted a topographical map I would go to Ordinance Survey; For nautical charts I would go to NOAA. But for clear, precise, easily discernable maps of nations and the world, there is none better. NGS does throw in some satellite maps and a few thematic maps, as well as several dozen high level maps of major cities of the world. But their forte will always be maps of a political nature. Best of all, these mesh well with the NGS supplemental maps that come with the monthly magazine, i.e. same color scheme and font.
And then, as I said before, there is precision. I have seen atlases from other major publishers that are just plain wrong: parts of countries missing, roads and bridges where there are none, and worst of all, factual errors. NGS has been precise and accurate for as long as I have been viewing their maps. They are also politically neutral thus all disputed boundaries are indicated and annotated in red, e.g. Northern Cyprus, Gaza, Spratly Islands, etc.
So if you are planning on touring Europe and you absolutely must know what elevation you are at, or perhaps you harbor concerns about accidentally entering a sub-alpine vegetation zone without knowing it, then by all means buy the Rand McNally or Times Atlas. But if, like most people, you use an atlas to help understand where you are and where you are going, NGS World Atlas is the best.
